BRF Witness
November/December 2006
Volume 39, Number 6
I have added an “I” (in parentheses) to the subject, because it is my understanding that I am to speak out of my own experience in using and interpreting the Bible. I am not claiming to speak for anyone else. Nor is what I say intended to represent any one group. It is not that I claim to know everything there is to know about the subject, or that what I say will settle these matters once and for all. But neither do I expect to apologize for what I believe and what have become foundational pillars that undergird my faith.
Biblical interpretation or hermeneutics has to do with how we arrive at the meaning of Scripture. It is likely this issue, as much as anything else that led to the beginnings of the Brethren movement nearly 300 years ago. Alexander Mack and his group came to quite some different conclusions about what was the meaning of certain passages of Scripture when compared to what was being said by other religious groups. Among some unique Brethren conclusions are these-that we should actually wash each other’s feet during communion; that we consider the Lord’s Supper to be a fellowship meal rather than just the bread and cup communion; and that we have members of the same gender actually kiss each other in what is called the “holy kiss.” All of my early influences in the Church of the Brethren suggested to me that the Bible is the Word of God. All the Sunday school lessons, all the Bible study sessions, and all the sermons I heard-were presented with the emphasis that God speaks through the written Word of God, and that the Bible is the book where it is written. It was only after I was called to the Christian ministry at age 22, and began to take the reading course for ministry training, that I became exposed to other ideas. The benefits of this course were that it opened my eyes to try and carefully discern what can be some dangerous methods of biblical interpretation.
Whenever we read, study, and proceed to teach God’s Word, some interpretation is required. In Nehemiah 8:8 we read, “So they read in the book of the Law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.” The meaning of Scripture requires a correct understanding of words and phrases. Since language and verbal expression is gradually evolving, sometimes we need to be aware of how certain expressions were understood years ago. Here is where the use of modem translations and paraphrases and Bible dictionaries and commentaries, etc can be helpful. An example of how various meanings can be taken out of one sentence can be illustrated this way. A husband comes home from his job and while eating the evening meal which his wife has made, he asks, “Where did you get this meat?” He could have a number of things in mind by asking the question “The meat tastes good;” or, “The meat tastes bad.” He may be wondering if it was cheap or expensive. He could be wondering if she bought it at the new store, which just opened, or at the one they’ve been buying from for years. Sometimes simple words can be understood in a multiple number of ways.
What are some guidelines that inform my use and interpretation of the Bible?
1. I try and read from the Bible every day.
I am an early riser (about 5:30 am) and my Bible reading and personal prayers are usually over by 6:00 am. Then my wife and I read a portion of the Bible together at breakfast time and we kneel together and take turns praying. This practice of family worship was firmly implanted in my mind when growing up in my parents’ home where the family altar was as regular as eating breakfast. So, first of all I use the Bible by reading it regularly.
2. I accept the authority, inspiration, and dependability of the Bible.
By “authority” I mean that God’s Word is forever settled in heaven (Psalm 119:89). In Psalm 119 there are 176 verses, which make it the longest chapter in the Bible, and all but three of the verses make a reference in one way or another to God’s Word. The inspiration of the Bible is taught in 2 Timothy 3:16 where we read that “All scripture is given by inspiration of God.” We are also taught in the Word that “No scripture is by any private interpretation; holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:21). God used human writers who were under an unusual level of divine guidance. They were not free-lance writers and they didn’t need to have a committee meeting to plan the project.
These approximately 40 different writers lived over a 1600-year period and avoided giving misinformation, wrong prophecies, and other misgivings-because the Holy Spirit was guiding the whole process through their lives. God the Holy Spirit “breathed” the Word into their minds. God’s Word is dependable. In Revelation 22:18-19, strong counsel is given against subtracting from or adding to, this Book. Since God’s Word is settled in heaven, we have no right to change it I accept the Bible’s accuracy and information even when I don’t completely understand it.
3. I try and let the Bible speak plainly to me “just as it reads.”
It is a process by which I try and allow God to impose the meaning of the Word on me, rather than my imposing my understanding on God. Whenever we read a recipe or the written assignment from a professor, we are obligated to live by our understanding of those words. Most people learn to be very literal when they read cookbooks. Students are supposed to he literalists when fulfilling a written assignment. We are not free to do anything we want to with the actual words of Scripture, if we want to be faithful with God’s Word. Unless the text or context suggests something else, I accept the Bible in a very literal way.
4. I try and study a text with the context and cultural background in mind.
We can read in the Bible that Judas “went out and hanged himself;” at another place, “Go and do thou likewise;” and still another, “What thou doest do quickly!” No one would accept that manner of stringing isolated texts together to form what would be a ridiculous conclusion. I’ve used a number of different types of preaching, but my preference is to give an expository message on a passage of Scripture rather than using a subject and single verse texts. This tends to force me to do more background and analysis, and see the information that nestles close by; otherwise, I may focus only on a single isolated text. The Bible is its own best commentary. We need to see how an isolated text relates to what the rest of the Bible says on the subject. One caution is that the Bible student can get so carried away with all kinds of contextual and cultural considerations, that the central force of the actual text is lost.
5. I try and notice rules of grammar such as figures of speech.
The Bible is full of real life-situation stories. Many of them actually happened—others are used as parables, illustrations, or examples. When Jesus called Herod a “fox” in Luke 13:32, surely He was not meaning that Herod was actually a furry creature that walked on four legs and had a bushy tail. He wanted to use graphic language to convey that anyone who is sly enough to steal his brother’s wife, has some of the characteristics of a fox. This is a figure of speech known as a metaphor, in which an object will be called by a term which it resembles .Another example is seen where Jesus said, “I am the vine, ye are the branches” (John 15:5) There are hyperboles which are planned exaggerations for effect. There are metonymies, parables, allegories, and euphemisms. Being aware that any of these can be present at various places in the Bible, keeps us from being a “wooden literalist” (just as dumb as a fence post) in taking everything as strictly literal.
6. I understand both the Old and New Testament to constitute a unity of truth that represents a progression of divine revelation.
The high water mark of God’s self-disclosure is not in the Old Testament. It is in the coming of God’s one and only Son, Jesus Christ. So, the Bible sets forth a movement of God with the initiative coming from God and not humans. God brings us up through the theological infancy of the Old Testament to the maturity of the New Testament. This is why the Brethren have historically said the New Testament is our only rule of faith and practice. The Old Testament speaks in types and shadows; the New Testament gives their substance. The Old Testament contains prophecies; the New Testament records their fulfillment. The Old Testament is the schoolroom; the New Testament represents the graduation. Since Jesus is the high water mark of God’s revelation, we should try and understand the Old Testament through the eyes of Jesus and what He said about it. This is not to suggest that the words of Jesus are on a higher level of inspiration than the other New Testament writers. Jesus simply did not address everything. Some was left for others to address.
7. I seek to study the Bible with the intent to obey it.
There is a connection between what I’ve done with obeying past understandings and how much light I’ll be given in the future. There is a saying that “Light obeyed increases light; light rejected brings night.” In John 7:17, Jesus said, “If any one will do His will, he shall know of the doctrine.” Here, a willingness to do, precedes greater knowing. In 2 Corinthians 3, Paul clearly says it is impossible for the carnal mind to understand the things of God. When someone is seen to take an adamant stand against the very obvious, plain meaning of a text, it raises the possibility that such a person is in need of a new birth experience and a consequent infilling of the Holy Spirit to enable divine understanding to take place. I personally really desire to be taught by the Holy Spirit, and want Him to correct me whenever my carnal nature gets in the way of proper divine understanding.
8. I wish to be open to be taught by a wide range of voices when they give evidence of having a high view of scripture.
Some of these will be lay people without any formal training in biblical interpretation-people who can see practical implications in applying the Bible. Some will be people highly trained in a study of original languages and in ancient history. Others will be those who have sharpened their skills in expository delivery. In other words, I desire to be taught by a wide community of believers who have displayed a respectful and devotional approach to Bible study. I want some room for personally confessing to wrong conclusions and some time to pick up the pieces that come from forgiveness–and then move on.
These eight guidelines constitute most of the broad strokes of my own discipline in using and interpreting the Bible. Many smaller pieces could be added.
During the Annual Conference debate on homosexuality in 2002, a speech was given by Warren Kissinger who worked for many years in the archives in Washington, DC. His speech in essence (as I recall it) went something like this: Years ago Brethren found biblical texts that taught against women serving in the pastoral ministry, but we found a way around that. Then we found texts that taught against the remarriage of divorced persons, but we found a way around that. Now we are facing scriptural texts that teach against homosexual practice. In light of what we’ve done with a number of other biblical texts, we really shouldn’t have any trouble working around these also. Is this an example of Brethren biblical interpretation in disarray? Have we modern-day Brethren given ourselves too much liberty in handling the Word of God? When we find something in the Bible that we don’t like, do we proceed to find a way around it rather than adjusting ourselves to its implications?
Years ago someone was critical of his straight-forward preaching, and said to Billy Sunday, “You rub the fur the wrong way” Billy’s answer was, “Well-let the cat turn around.” Let’s consider what needs to be turned around in order to again have unity in how we use and interpret the Bible.
The preceding article was presented at the South/Central Indiana District Gathering on November 1, 2003, in Kokomo, Indiana. It is used here by permission of the author.
– James Myer